k-3 images lacking wow factor

kh1234567890 · 11-26-2013, 03:26 AM

Originally posted by tittermary

do any of these pop for you?? all processed in light room btw, there is nothing wrong with the dng lr profile.
Flickr: tittermary's Photostream

Your non K-3 (Nikon etc.) shots look better than the K-3 ones on my calibrated monitor. The K-3 profile gamma needs tweaking ...

**Rondec** · 11-26-2013, 03:46 AM

Originally posted by tittermary

what white balance setting are you using? lr works fine for me

When the photos show up with the camera recommended white balance, it is usually way off. It isn't hard to fix with the eye dropper or sometimes even picking Auto, but it isn't right most of the time. I'm glad it is working for you, but it definitely needs more support from Adobe.

Kennod · 11-26-2013, 04:06 AM

The K-3 or the K-5 are technically capable of producing WOW results. I think it is upto the photographer to make it happen.

Parry · 11-26-2013, 04:24 AM

Originally posted by Kennod

The K-3 or the K-5 are technically capable of producing WOW results. I think it is upto the photographer to make it happen.

It has to be said, without my FA Limiteds and K f/1.2 I'd struggle to produce the images I now do (which aren't world class, but for a simpleton like me, not too bad).

So much depends on what is stuck on the front of the camera.

Kennod · 11-26-2013, 04:40 AM

Originally posted by Parry

So much depends on what is stuck on the front of the camera.

...and even more depends on who is stuck behind it

**Mikesul** · 11-26-2013, 05:02 AM

Reaction to the K-3 seems similar to the response of NEX users to the NEX 7 when it first came out. Some were thrilled but many, including me, were underwhelmed. In time its strengths and weaknesses were accommodated and users became very happy. The K-3 is in every way a better camera than the NEX-7. We will learn how to work around the high ISO noise issue which, for me, is the only disappointment so far.

Parry · 11-26-2013, 05:24 AM

Originally posted by Kennod

...and even more depends on who is stuck behind it

Not really, not in my case. My shots were utterly terrible until I got the FA Limiteds. They do most of the work. Lightroom does the rest.

rawr · 11-26-2013, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by Mikesul

the [apparent] high ISO noise issue

Emphasis is mine

Looking at many K-3 test images, including a few of my own now, the K-3 'high ISO issue' is little different from the K-5's.

Even if you use the supplied software (DCU5) to process the RAW's, K-3 high ISO's are very well handled and workable. Plus I can't wait to try Lightroom 5 or DxO 9's new 'Prime' NR engine on the K-3, once they support it.

**TER-OR** · 11-26-2013, 06:38 AM

If I were to judge my K-5 based on jpg output I'd also say it was inconsistent and lacking "wow." Not that the images can't be good, but often they lack a little. When I look at the RAW images, however, they almost always look better even without editing. I think any camera's jpg engine is going to make some decisions and they're not always for the best. The images I can get with a little novice tweaking in LR4 are far better.

As mentioned, it will take some time for the post-processing software to catch up with the new camera. It will also take a little while for the experts to figure out how to get the most out of the in-camera jpg processing.

tittermary · 11-26-2013, 07:13 AM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

Your non K-3 (Nikon etc.) shots look better than the K-3 ones on my calibrated monitor. The K-3 profile gamma needs tweaking ...

yeah still working that out, could be me though I am used to processing nikon and fuji and I haven't got the k3 figured out 100%

profile works but it it could be better as some of you have said.

RonHendriks1966 · 11-26-2013, 10:14 AM - **1 Like**

If I'm luckey I will get a print in tomorrow. The size I orderd is 120x80cm (or 47x31,5 inch). If there is any wow in it, I will notice it.

**mattb123** · 11-26-2013, 11:52 AM

I felt the same way when I rented a K-5 as a K-x user. I was expecting to look at my photos and say "Wow!" but I didn't. About a year after that I bought a K-5 and eventually grew to love it.
I'm thinking my initial response was due to a couple of things. One was differences in controls, so that when shooting in the heat of the moment, I might not be able to adjust the setting I want quickly and may not have had it set in the best way. The other was that I was just running my images through the same process as the K-x, and the K-5 needed slightly different tweaks.
Now I have a K-3 and have felt some of the same feelings when reviewing my photos. I had a couple of high ISO shots early on that seemed very noisy compared to what I was expecting. As I have had it for a few weeks now, I find I need to sharpen less on the K-3 and that helps the noise issue quite a bit.

So if you just apply the exact same preset to a photo that would have worked well for a K-5 image, it may not work as well with a K-3 image. I'm still experimenting with processing, NR, WB, and everything else for the K-3 and am finding the old bag of tricks doesn't always work now. I need some new tricks or to revise some old ones I think.

That being said I have taken some images with the K-3 that I'm quite happy with so my initial buyer's remorse has lessened quite a bit. I'm hopeful I'll continue to get used to it and how to process the images as well as some firmware/software updates to accommodate it that are surely on the way.

FYI, I always shoot RAW so these comments are all based on that.

Here's a photo from Sunday that I like. Taken with the K-3 and DA 18-135 (not my best lens, but probably the best to haul with me skiing)
Processed in LR4. Light wasn't great, but not terrible. Detail came out well I thought.

RonHendriks1966 · 01-18-2014, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by rbefly

Hi Ron,
Based on most of the posts so far, I'd have to say you either learn much faster, are a much better photographer, or maybe, lucky.
Whatever the reason for your quick success, hang on to it!
Ron

There are two images I made on the first day I owned the K-3 in a post I put up in the newssector. The portrait is #28 image I made with the K-3.

So, do I feel Lucky?

You can find it:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/248845-ricoh-imaging-europe-s-s-report-meeting.html

**monochrome** · 01-18-2014, 04:16 PM

I don't share images much here (never, actually) but mt impression after a month is I'm just starting to get enough hand control to manage sharp images with the new sensor. On inspection EVERY image suffered from motion blur. I didn't have such problems with the K10 or K-01.

stevebrot · 01-18-2014, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by Parry

My shots were utterly terrible until I got the FA Limiteds.

Happy for you! Unfortunate for me, the pixie dust of my 77/1.8 limited stays inside the camera.

Steve

11-26-2013, 11:52 AM	#57
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,873	I felt the same way when I rented a K-5 as a K-x user. I was expecting to look at my photos and say "Wow!" but I didn't. About a year after that I bought a K-5 and eventually grew to love it. I'm thinking my initial response was due to a couple of things. One was differences in controls, so that when shooting in the heat of the moment, I might not be able to adjust the setting I want quickly and may not have had it set in the best way. The other was that I was just running my images through the same process as the K-x, and the K-5 needed slightly different tweaks. Now I have a K-3 and have felt some of the same feelings when reviewing my photos. I had a couple of high ISO shots early on that seemed very noisy compared to what I was expecting. As I have had it for a few weeks now, I find I need to sharpen less on the K-3 and that helps the noise issue quite a bit. So if you just apply the exact same preset to a photo that would have worked well for a K-5 image, it may not work as well with a K-3 image. I'm still experimenting with processing, NR, WB, and everything else for the K-3 and am finding the old bag of tricks doesn't always work now. I need some new tricks or to revise some old ones I think. That being said I have taken some images with the K-3 that I'm quite happy with so my initial buyer's remorse has lessened quite a bit. I'm hopeful I'll continue to get used to it and how to process the images as well as some firmware/software updates to accommodate it that are surely on the way. FYI, I always shoot RAW so these comments are all based on that. Here's a photo from Sunday that I like. Taken with the K-3 and DA 18-135 (not my best lens, but probably the best to haul with me skiing) Processed in LR4. Light wasn't great, but not terrible. Detail came out well I thought. Last edited by mattb123; 11-26-2013 at 12:51 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sports Images with the K-3	RonHendriks1966	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	365	06-18-2017 07:24 AM
The K-3 -APS-c and cropped wildlife images	normhead	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	39	10-16-2013 10:57 AM
Pentax DA 17-70 f4 - wow - images	philbaum	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	07-18-2012 12:02 AM
K-5... Wow wow wow wow wow!! Hugely impressive.	65535	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	85	11-08-2010 08:45 PM
Wow...Huge difference in K10D images	Darius4522	Pentax DSLR Discussion	48	10-15-2007 09:48 PM

11-26-2013, 03:26 AM	#46
kh1234567890 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Manchester, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,653	Originally posted by tittermary do any of these pop for you?? all processed in light room btw, there is nothing wrong with the dng lr profile. Flickr: tittermary's Photostream Your non K-3 (Nikon etc.) shots look better than the K-3 ones on my calibrated monitor. The K-3 profile gamma needs tweaking ...

11-26-2013, 03:46 AM	#47
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by tittermary what white balance setting are you using? lr works fine for me When the photos show up with the camera recommended white balance, it is usually way off. It isn't hard to fix with the eye dropper or sometimes even picking Auto, but it isn't right most of the time. I'm glad it is working for you, but it definitely needs more support from Adobe.

11-26-2013, 04:06 AM	#48
Kennod Senior Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Melbourne Posts: 126	The K-3 or the K-5 are technically capable of producing WOW results. I think it is upto the photographer to make it happen.

11-26-2013, 04:24 AM	#49
Parry Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 606	Originally posted by Kennod The K-3 or the K-5 are technically capable of producing WOW results. I think it is upto the photographer to make it happen. It has to be said, without my FA Limiteds and K f/1.2 I'd struggle to produce the images I now do (which aren't world class, but for a simpleton like me, not too bad). So much depends on what is stuck on the front of the camera.

11-26-2013, 04:40 AM	#50
Kennod Senior Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Melbourne Posts: 126	Originally posted by Parry So much depends on what is stuck on the front of the camera. ...and even more depends on who is stuck behind it

11-26-2013, 05:02 AM	#51
Mikesul Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,594	Reaction to the K-3 seems similar to the response of NEX users to the NEX 7 when it first came out. Some were thrilled but many, including me, were underwhelmed. In time its strengths and weaknesses were accommodated and users became very happy. The K-3 is in every way a better camera than the NEX-7. We will learn how to work around the high ISO noise issue which, for me, is the only disappointment so far.

11-26-2013, 05:24 AM	#52
Parry Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 606	Originally posted by Kennod ...and even more depends on who is stuck behind it Not really, not in my case. My shots were utterly terrible until I got the FA Limiteds. They do most of the work. Lightroom does the rest.

11-26-2013, 06:27 AM	#53
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Mikesul the [apparent] high ISO noise issue Emphasis is mine Looking at many K-3 test images, including a few of my own now, the K-3 'high ISO issue' is little different from the K-5's. Even if you use the supplied software (DCU5) to process the RAW's, K-3 high ISO's are very well handled and workable. Plus I can't wait to try Lightroom 5 or DxO 9's new 'Prime' NR engine on the K-3, once they support it.

11-26-2013, 06:38 AM	#54
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	If I were to judge my K-5 based on jpg output I'd also say it was inconsistent and lacking "wow." Not that the images can't be good, but often they lack a little. When I look at the RAW images, however, they almost always look better even without editing. I think any camera's jpg engine is going to make some decisions and they're not always for the best. The images I can get with a little novice tweaking in LR4 are far better. As mentioned, it will take some time for the post-processing software to catch up with the new camera. It will also take a little while for the experts to figure out how to get the most out of the in-camera jpg processing.

11-26-2013, 07:13 AM	#55
tittermary Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 35	Originally posted by kh1234567890 Your non K-3 (Nikon etc.) shots look better than the K-3 ones on my calibrated monitor. The K-3 profile gamma needs tweaking ... yeah still working that out, could be me though I am used to processing nikon and fuji and I haven't got the k3 figured out 100% profile works but it it could be better as some of you have said.

11-26-2013, 10:14 AM - 1 Like	#56
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	If I'm luckey I will get a print in tomorrow. The size I orderd is 120x80cm (or 47x31,5 inch). If there is any wow in it, I will notice it.

01-18-2014, 03:13 PM	#58
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by rbefly Hi Ron, Based on most of the posts so far, I'd have to say you either learn much faster, are a much better photographer, or maybe, lucky. Whatever the reason for your quick success, hang on to it! Ron There are two images I made on the first day I owned the K-3 in a post I put up in the newssector. The portrait is #28 image I made with the K-3. So, do I feel Lucky? You can find it: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/248845-ricoh-imaging-europe-s-s-report-meeting.html

01-18-2014, 04:16 PM	#59
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	I don't share images much here (never, actually) but mt impression after a month is I'm just starting to get enough hand control to manage sharp images with the new sensor. On inspection EVERY image suffered from motion blur. I didn't have such problems with the K10 or K-01.

01-18-2014, 04:21 PM	#60
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Parry My shots were utterly terrible until I got the FA Limiteds. Happy for you! Unfortunate for me, the pixie dust of my 77/1.8 limited stays inside the camera. Steve